Date: Tue, 15 Jun 2010 02:24:22 -0400
From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>
To: Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>
Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org,
       linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, viro@ZenIV.linux.org.uk, josef@redhat.com,
       jeffmerkey@gmail.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/5] fsfreeze: freeze_super and thaw_bdev don't play well
 together
Message-ID: <20100615062422.GA7343@infradead.org>
References: <1276154395-24766-1-git-send-email-david@fromorbit.com>
 <1276154395-24766-4-git-send-email-david@fromorbit.com>
 <20100614152219.GC32354@infradead.org>
 <20100615000107.GJ6590@dastard>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20100615000107.GJ6590@dastard>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-08-17)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 929
Lines: 21

On Tue, Jun 15, 2010 at 10:01:07AM +1000, Dave Chinner wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 14, 2010 at 11:22:19AM -0400, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> > This breaks the "feature" that we can freeze a block device that doesn't
> > have a filesystem mounted yet.  For filesystems using get_sb_bdev that
> > prevents a new filesystem to be mounted on them.
> >
> > I'm not sure it's a particularly useful feature, but it's been there
> > since day 1 of the freeze support.  The easiest way to not break it
> > would be to keep the per-sb freeze count only for that case and only
> > check it during mount.
> 
> You mean the per-bdev freeze count, right? So freeze/thaw_bdev would
> have to remain?

Yes.

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/